Mike Bickle, leader of International house of prayer (IHOP) has been credibly accused of sexual abuse spanning several decades.

[HacklemanPoke]

You can’t ban any religion in this country because of the first Amendment. Inorder to do so would take a change to the bill of rights. Which means that the states would have to vote to do that and that ain’t happening. It’s also stupid to ban a religion because of the stupidity of some.

But you know what you can do? You can raise a butt ton of $ on speaking about this from the pulpit. Did analytics for a church once that looked at giving per person per week on many different levels. One of those was on sermon topics. Giving per person per week was higher when certain topics were covered from the stage. Also of note, the type of worship music played prior to the plate pass made cash giving per person go up.

 

[Polds4OSU]

You can’t ban any religion in this country because of the first Amendment. Inorder to do so would take a change to the bill of rights. Which means that the states would have to vote to do that and that ain’t happening. It’s also stupid to ban a religion because of the stupidity of some.

The first amendment only prevents the Govt of the ge US from creating and promoting a religion...doesn't protect anything from being banned


The US currently bans people from traveling to the US based on religious extremist in their countries.. if they can legally ban what they consider illegal extremist from traveling here. It won't be long before they start targeting religious extremist already hear and we know the left will come to power and paint all Christianity as extremist (using extremist Christianity that already is rising as their example) and ban it on the precedent set by Republican POTUS decisions from the past


the United States currently bans nationals of five Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen — and a minuscule number of North Koreans and Venezuelans from coming to the country on most or all types of visas

 

[GOGETUMPOKE]

But you know what you can do? You can raise a butt ton of $ on speaking about this from the pulpit. Did analytics for a church once that looked at giving per person per week on many different levels. One of those was on sermon topics. Giving per person per week was higher when certain topics were covered from the stage. Also of note, the type of worship music played prior to the plate pass made cash giving per person go up.

We always take the offering before the sermon. Maybe we need to rethink our schedule.

 

[Polds4OSU]

We always take the offering before the sermon. Maybe we need to rethink our schedule.

Throw on a dinging bell and flashing lights that goes off every 3-4th person....tribes might not like that though

 

[GOGETUMPOKE]

The first amendment only prevents the Govt of the ge US from creating and promoting a religion...doesn't protect anything from being banned


The US currently bans people from traveling to the US based on religious extremist in their countries.. if they can legally ban what they consider illegal extremist from traveling here. It won't be long before they start targeting religious extremist already hear and we know the left will come to power and paint all Christianity as extremist (using extremist Christianity that already is rising as their example) and ban it on the precedent set by Republican POTUS decisions from the past


the United States currently bans nationals of five Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen — and a minuscule number of North Koreans and Venezuelans from coming to the country on most or all types of visas

They aren’t going to ban Christianity in the US brother. I’d be willing to bet all of the money that I planned to sock into shorting the orange juice market in the investment thread on it.

 

[Polds4OSU]

They aren’t going to ban Christianity in the US brother. I’d be willing to bet all of the money that I planned to sock into shorting the orange juice market in the investment thread on it.

I'll will stick with the Bible warning on this one...thanks though! I hope your investments go well


4] And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
[5] For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
[6] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
[7] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
[8] All these are the beginning of sorrows.
[9] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
[10] And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
[11] And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

 

[GOGETUMPOKE]

Throw on a dinging bell and flashing lights that goes off every 3-4th person....tribes might not like that though

We’re really not into the pyrotechnics. Just a lot of scripture, heaven, hell, and stuff like that ya know.

 

[Verbal]

funny how preachers have been preaching that the end of the word is near for hundreds if not thousands of years and it still hasn’t happened.

 

[HacklemanPoke]

We always take the offering before the sermon. Maybe we need to rethink our schedule.

If you plan your sermons based on giving…then to quote someone from this thread earlier “Seriously you’re going to the wrong church”

 

[GOGETUMPOKE]

If you plan your sermons based on giving…then to quote someone from this thread earlier “Seriously you’re going to the wrong church”

I was being sarcastic but thanks for staying true to form. Keep being you man.

 

[UpGrayedd Double Dose]

The first amendment only prevents the Govt of the ge US from creating and promoting a religion...doesn't protect anything from being banned


The US currently bans people from traveling to the US based on religious extremist in their countries.. if they can legally ban what they consider illegal extremist from traveling here. It won't be long before they start targeting religious extremist already hear and we know the left will come to power and paint all Christianity as extremist (using extremist Christianity that already is rising as their example) and ban it on the precedent set by Republican POTUS decisions from the past


the United States currently bans nationals of five Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen — and a minuscule number of North Koreans and Venezuelans from coming to the country on most or all types of visas

Actually, the first amendment does protect a religion from being banned. You got the first part right, but you must have forgotten the next line.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

 

[Polds4OSU]

Actually, the first amendment does protect a religion from being banned. You got the first part right, but you must have forgotten the next line.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

You do realize there is already established legal definitions in place to (at some point in the future Not yet) it will be argued that the practice of Christianity will run against the "public morals" and that will be where it will be banned.

The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest.

 

[CowboyJD]

Eventually it will yes....IMHO...and because of people like this guy

No it won't.

Stop it....just stop it.

 

[CowboyJD]

The first amendment only prevents the Govt of the ge US from creating and promoting a religion...doesn't protect anything from being banned


The US currently bans people from traveling to the US based on religious extremist in their countries.. if they can legally ban what they consider illegal extremist from traveling here. It won't be long before they start targeting religious extremist already hear and we know the left will come to power and paint all Christianity as extremist (using extremist Christianity that already is rising as their example) and ban it on the precedent set by Republican POTUS decisions from the past


the United States currently bans nationals of five Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen — and a minuscule number of North Koreans and Venezuelans from coming to the country on most or all types of visas

And yet they haven't banned practicing the Muslim faith in America.

Because they can't.

Because of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

You're understanding of the First Amendment is woefully inadequate.

 

[CowboyJD]

You do realize there is already established legal definitions in place to (at some point in the future Not yet) it will be argued that the practice of Christianity will run against the "public morals" and that will be where it will be banned.

The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest.

No.....no....this is radically incorrect.

No religion has been or ever will be banned in its entirety as violating "public morals".

The Supreme Court ruled in Employment Division v. State that held that the 1st Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion wasn’t violated when a state passed a “neutral, generally applicable law” that just happened to make it harder for some people to practice their religion.

A "ban" on Christianity as contrary to "public morals" like you're talking about would be about as far from a "neutral, generally applicable law" as you could get.

In Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah the Supreme Court held that a seemingly facially neutral statute banning " "unnecessar[y]" killing of "an animal in a public or private ritual or ceremony not for the primary purpose of food consumption" to be unconstitutional because it decided that although the ordinances were facially neutral, they were religiously “gerrymandered with care” to only apply to religious killings...primarily by practitioners of Santeria.

Kennedy's opinion included this quote, “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection”.

A statute "banning Christianity" as against "public morals" is clearly and obviously unconstitutional. Rankly so. So much so that it's ludicrous to even think that it would ever happen. And that's just the constitutional law side of the equation. From the political side, there is no way we are ever....EVER....going to see a banning of what is the predominant belief system in the country.

 

[DxCowboy]

You do realize there is already established legal definitions in place to (at some point in the future Not yet) it will be argued that the practice of Christianity will run against the "public morals" and that will be where it will be banned.

The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest.

Wow, you're eaten up with this stuff.

 

[UpGrayedd Double Dose]

You do realize there is already established legal definitions in place to (at some point in the future Not yet) it will be argued that the practice of Christianity will run against the "public morals" and that will be where it will be banned.

The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest.

Please provide the already established legal definitions and legal precedents (if you have them) that would subject Christianity and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to a morality test.

The first amendment protects pornography and all sorts of morally depraved things, but Christianity is going to be banned because it "runs afoul of public morals"? Do you actually read what you type and not understand how absurd it sounds?

I try not to speak in absolutes, so I won't say it will never be banned, but it ain't happening anytime in the near future (our lifetime), and it won't be because of a morality test/some preacher that is a sexual pervert. Now if you want to talk about how these heretics and hypocrites are destroying Christianity from within and why more and more people are leaving the church and young people aren't ever joining, that is a conversation we might agree on. However, to say that Christianity is going to be banned based on morality is absurd.